We compared Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) and Microsoft Azure File Storage based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
In summary, Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is highly praised for its scalability, performance, and ease of use, with seamless integration with other AWS services. On the other hand, Microsoft Azure File Storage is appreciated for its strong security measures and efficient file sharing capabilities, with a focus on scalability and ease of use. Amazon EFS users value the system's reliability and intuitive interface, while Microsoft Azure File Storage users highlight its integration with Azure services and responsive customer support. Areas for improvement for Amazon EFS include enhancing performance and visibility, while Microsoft Azure File Storage could benefit from faster file transfer speeds and a more user-friendly interface. Both products offer reasonable pricing and a positive return on investment, catering to the diverse needs of businesses with efficient file storage solutions.
Features: Amazon EFS stands out for its scalability, high performance, ease of use, reliability, and seamless integration with other AWS services. Microsoft Azure File Storage excels in scalability, ease of use, integration with other Azure services, efficient file sharing capabilities, strong security measures, and cross-platform file management.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost for Amazon EFS is described as straightforward and easy, with reasonable and affordable pricing. In contrast, Microsoft Azure File Storage has a straightforward setup cost and is considered reasonable and competitive in pricing. Users have expressed satisfaction with the flexibility and options provided by both products., Amazon EFS was praised for its efficiency, scalability, and cost-effectiveness, while Microsoft Azure File Storage showed significant ROI with cost savings, improved efficiency, and seamless collaboration features.
Room for Improvement: Amazon EFS could benefit from improvements in terms of performance and speed, increasing visibility and monitoring capabilities, and providing more flexibility in file system sizes and scalability. On the other hand, users of Microsoft Azure File Storage desire increased file transfer speed, a more intuitive interface, and expanded storage options.
Deployment and customer support: The duration required to establish a new tech solution, such as Amazon EFS and Microsoft Azure File Storage, varies among users. Some users reported spending three months on deployment for Amazon EFS, while Microsoft Azure File Storage had a mix of three-month deployments and setups., Amazon EFS customer service is highly regarded, with users satisfied with helpful and responsive support. Microsoft Azure File Storage also receives positive feedback for its prompt and reliable assistance.
The summary above is based on 37 interviews we conducted recently with Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) and Microsoft Azure File Storage users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"I appreciate Amazon's extensive range of services, which makes it a favorable choice."
"The solution's technical support is good."
"The most beneficial feature of the product for data storage stems from the fact that it serves as a shared file storage."
"We can run code and deploy it whenever we want."
"EFS is flexible."
"The solution is scalable."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"We are not that big of a cloud user. We just use it for the storage of our bytes. The most valuable aspect is the storage."
"The interface is very good."
"Its simplicity of use is most valuable. It's easy to start working with it and understand it. It's easier to transfer files between different users. I'm able to move files from my device to my manager's device without any issues or without facing any problems in between."
"What I like about Microsoft Azure File Storage is its convenience for customers, cost-effectiveness, and high availability."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Azure File Storage is the cloud file storage capability."
"Its most valuable features are speed and security."
"It's a scalable solution."
"I like that we can copy and download data using Azure. It's not just for file storage; we can also use it for large data sets or to host static web applications."
"The immutable storage features are valuable."
"Specifically, when it comes to the file system for the learning system, we encountered performance issues with both Azure and AWS."
"Its deployment process could be faster while installing the Python package directly into the environment."
"It could be better in connecting with Windows Server instances."
"When we faced some issues, the support team took a lot of time to resolve them."
"The lack of transparency in the costs attached to the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The user activity needs to be more connected."
"It should be simplified. There are people who don't have cloud experience. It should be storage that we are able to just connect to."
"The interface seems strange and complicated."
"It's not very intuitive."
"The security could always be modernized."
"The provider needs to collect more information about the products."
"Sometimes it takes very long to refresh the information."
"Licensing costs are expensive."
"The solution should support all the legacy storage systems."
"They should make the solution more user-friendly."
"It would be helpful if we could remove data that we don't frequently access to reduce the cost of the storage."
More Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Cloud Storage with 9 reviews while Microsoft Azure File Storage is ranked 1st in Public Cloud Storage Services with 40 reviews. Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is rated 8.6, while Microsoft Azure File Storage is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) writes "Useful for storing details of projects and has an easy configuration". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Azure File Storage writes "Various storage options available, high availability, and quick deployment". Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is most compared with Google Cloud Storage, NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, Amazon S3 Glacier, Azure NetApp Files and Amazon S3, whereas Microsoft Azure File Storage is most compared with Azure NetApp Files, Wasabi, Amazon S3, Amazon S3 Glacier and Google Cloud Storage. See our Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs. Microsoft Azure File Storage report.
We monitor all Cloud Storage reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
